"I wonder how it looks at 480"
"sets video quality at 480"
Even counting in bitrate and given the size of the display in non theather mode (approach Switch screen), Game still looks really good while playing.
Not saying other version dont look better or people can not chose em, but some of the dismissive comments based on it being 480 read more like complaining based on a given numeral value that straight playing the game and seeing a problem with the visuals itself in that case.
The funny thing is before this information was made available I mostly only saw praise for the port and how it was a good port. Now that people have a number put on it some will change that narrative despite not having an issue with it originally.
I'm not sure putting a YouTube video in 480p from PS4 footage is a good indicator ?
is a 40$ remake of three PS1 games considered "AAA"?I'm looking forward to hear how it sold between the PC, Xbox One and Switch version. We'll finally know how viable AAA third party releases are on the Switch.
It's really not bad in handheld, halfway through Crash 2 now and it honestly looks really nice.i was excited to play the game on switch, but i mostly play in handheld mode and 480p sounds rough.
the fact that they weren't able to run it at 60fps on x/pro makes it seem like it's a much more demanding game than what it looks like
But people told me that the game looked the same. -.-Some differences between the Switch version and the other consoles versions are that it has removed fur effects, removed reflections, uses some lower quality textures, has reduced effects during some explosions and has a shorter draw distance. Reflections seem to render at the same resolution on PS4, PS4 Pro, Xbox One and Xbox One X.
The visuals are pretty good and advanced, so as far as the rendering tech goes you could say it is.
The engine has been on switch since launch, or has everyone forgotten imaginatorsGiven its based on the Skylanders engine which also wasn't native on Switch it's not surprising. But given the scale of the levels on this game it's a little disappointing - however the IQ is still perfectly fine in portable and doesn't detract much from the games.
Xbox one x hitting native 4k again. A true 4k console. It's insane that they regularly get over twice the performance out of the x compared to the pro.
Wow, 480p on Switch? Played through the enritety of the first game handheld and it felt more like 600p with on obvious increase to 720p when docked.
Numbers don't always mean everything, just remember that. Going to get the PC version later down the line just to experience that sweet 60fps though.
A) and C) I can reply to whatever I like
No, I think people get your point quite good
Why can't the PC handle 30FPS, come on!
The game is pretty good on Switch, despite these numbers it's still a looker, imo.
Take that as you will, but it's the case for many Switch games.
Game does look soft on Switch, but I thought it was 540-600p handheld, since it doesnt look that blurry.
i was excited to play the game on switch, but i mostly play in handheld mode and 480p sounds rough.
Not having a 60fps option on the enhanced consoles is just shoddy given all the games that offer a choice between performance and resolution these days.
Activision is wrong, it's a remake. Please don't start this discussion every fucking time.
You are wrong.no, the game use the same original design, gameplay and IA encounters... it's the same game with only superficial changes, it's a remaster like the box correctly implies.
activision and microsoft use the same correct standards to classify this, see halo anniversary, gears UE and fable anniversary, all them are graphical remade but are promoted with the term remaster, you really think that giant corporations in this industry are wrong? cmon...
one topic really simple and people still trying to confuse every time.
remake = Final fantasy VII R for obvious reasons.
Not having a 60fps option on the enhanced consoles is just shoddy given all the games that offer a choice between performance and resolution these days.
It's possible that the consoles just couldn't run them for one reason or another. Don't forget that even by the time they released they were using outdated parts, CPU especially.
The issue is there needs to be another term in between remasters and remakes to describe these types of titles, because there's a vast difference between this Crash Trilogy and the recent Dark Souls yet they're both called Remasters.no, the game use the same original design, gameplay and IA encounters... it's the same game with only superficial changes, it's a remaster like the box correctly implies.
activision and microsoft use the same correct standards to classify this, see halo anniversary, gears UE and fable anniversary, all them are graphical remade but are promoted with the term remaster, you really think that giant corporations in this industry are wrong? cmon...
one topic really simple and people still trying to confuse every time.
remake = Final fantasy VII R for obvious reasons.
I have a really hard time believing the Pro and X can't run this game at 60. I think some devs just don't want to complicate things by making a separate mode for the other platforms, or they think it might somehow make the game look less desirable to the lower end console customer (the large majority). Maybe they are worried it will mess with speed running or time attack related matters.It's possible that the consoles just couldn't run them for one reason or another. Don't forget that even by the time they released they were using outdated parts, CPU especially.
Yes? The gaming industry doesn't get to change the definition of decades worth of remastering work in both the film industry and the music recording industry, just because they say so. Crash is a flat-out remake, while MS's anniversary titles are a combination of a remake and a remaster, since they're running both simultaneously.no, the game use the same original design, gameplay and IA encounters... it's the same game with only superficial changes, it's a remaster like the box correctly implies.
activision and microsoft use the same correct standards to classify this, see halo anniversary, gears UE and fable anniversary, all them are graphical remade but are promoted with the term remaster, you really think that giant corporations in this industry are wrong? cmon...
one topic really simple and people still trying to confuse every time.
remake = Final fantasy VII R for obvious reasons.
no, the game use the same original design, gameplay and IA encounters... it's the same game with only superficial changes, it's a remaster like the box correctly implies.
activision and microsoft use the same correct standards to classify this, see halo anniversary, gears UE and fable anniversary, all them are graphical remade but are promoted with the term remaster, you really think that giant corporations in this industry are wrong? cmon...
one topic really simple and people still trying to confuse every time.
remake = Final fantasy VII R for obvious reasons.
An in-house engine from Vicarious, it was also used in the Marvel Alliance games.
Xbox one x hitting native 4k again. A true 4k console. It's insane that they regularly get over twice the performance out of the x compared to the pro.
i was excited to play the game on switch, but i mostly play in handheld mode and 480p sounds rough.
the fact that they weren't able to run it at 60fps on x/pro makes it seem like it's a much more demanding game than what it looks like
no one is surprised it doesn't run like the other PConsole, is just sand how earth and heaven apart this thread (direct footage and DF) are just cause DF provides a value and all the threads is just Doomposting about said value.Why are Switch folks suprised? Its a weak console with a Handheld function.
That's overly simplistic, the correct would say framerate is about where the bottleneck lies, in this particular generation it's often the cpu as consoles have a comparatively much stronger gpus, but even so there are plenty of cases where the gpu would hold the framerate back.
Both FF7r and Crash are NOT using the original assets or "masters" and thus there is ZERO difference between associating both as remakes. One is just embracing a creative template to mirror the original inspiration as closely as possible by rebuilding it from scratch, while the other is taking more creative liberties. Activision marketing is choosing to utilize the 'remaster' word improperly, leading to conflated misrepresentations as to what the term actually means.
Also if you want to get technical, the physics and hit detection in the Crash remake are not consistent with that of the original. Something a remaster would not suffer due to it updating and adhering to the original code.
When a music producer 'remasters' an old album, they don't get the band back in the recording booth to re-record the entire songlist. No, they are taking the old master recordings and using modern technology to improve the clarity and expand the soundscape. Yet, by your definition, literally re-recording the entire album from scratch would be a remaster which is nonsense.
The issue is there needs to be another term in between remasters and remakes to describe these types of titles, because there's a vast difference between this Crash Trilogy and the recent Dark Souls yet they're both called Remasters.
Why are Switch folks suprised? Its a weak console with a Handheld function.
Once again, video games don't get to use the term differently just because. A shot-for-shot, line-for-line remake of a film like Psycho or Funny Games isn't called a remaster of the original film; the remastered version of the original film is the remaster of the original film.you're wrong, the game logic can be equal to original using diferent code, one thing dont invalidate other.
same design, same gameplay, same IA, little discrepances dont change that... we can make 1:1 gameplay comparisons because that, it's obviously the old game design running behind new assets, you liking or not it's not an full remake like Final fantasy VII R and because that this game ( and many other examples ) are correctly classified for your publishers like remasters.
and dont put in this topic the term used in other industry ok, this dont make sense, im clearly speaking about gaming, it's much more than audio work.
Outlast 2 has been the only one genuinely impressive to me. But I'm just a nobody.There have been times where the system provides a better than expected port. This certainly is not one of them.
Native, as in, it's not dynamic. Most Switch games use dynamic res so they felt the need to state native."and in Portable Mode renders at a native resolution of approximately 853x480."
Ermm in what way is that native?? The switch screen is 1280x720. Assume they mean its static and doesn't change.